1. archie's Avatar
    This is not true.

    See this discussion (with supporting links).
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...d.php?t=134414
    But that's what MultiTouch is comprised of: software and hardware.

    Fingerworks developed the basic software and hardware interface, sold the techonlogy for years for mousing and interfacing with desktop computers under the name "MultiTouch". Apple bought the company and the patents and then adapted it for touch-screens, which we now find in the iPhone.
    DUDE, it's completely different hardware and the only thing that is the same in regards to software is the fact that they both incorporated gestures — but the gestures were completely different as well.

    Why do people not bother to read what I post?

    If you read what bring up, you may recall the specific issue and realize why Apple hired the 2 engineers to solve the trackpad issues they had in the summer of 2005. They had patented their multi-touch technology (which is different to what Fingerworks developed, even though it is spelled much the same way) over a year prior to this.

    So you need the hardware (screen with sensors) and the software (translates the touches to commands) in one device, so how is what Surur said not true?
    What Suror said is not true in that he is insinuating that Apple did not innovate because they purchased the patents. As I said, they had developed different technologies in both hardware and software that Apple had patented in 2004. If you would read what I had posted (or read the source, as would apparently be more satisfying) you would know this.


    And what Surur means about higher density of control elements with a stylus, if I may re-state is that with a stylus, you have a very precise tool for pointing to objects on a screen, so you can have small "boxes" and "selectable elements" with a stylus but you need larger elements with for finger-centric devices.
    If this is what he meant, I apologize for misunderstanding his use of the words "reduced accuracy" in describing the iPhone.

    Still if this is what he meant then I must take issue with this belief as well.

    I don't expect that you would understand all that goes into the iPhone but I would like to bring up one aspect of the iPhone interface that has previously been demoed in public. If a user feels the need to require more accuracy in editing and controlling the iPhone in certain situations, they can simply hold their finger down to get an enlarged bubble of the immediate area to more easily see the contents and easily make selections or edits or whatever.

    So no productivity implications as suror would have us believe.
    02-28-2007 07:35 PM
  2. surur's Avatar
    There are plenty of productivity implications in not having as many elements on the screen as possible e.g. traversing a hierarchical tree like a file system, filling in forms, choosing buttons (e.g. bold, underline, centre, align left, right etc etc).

    Surur
    02-28-2007 07:44 PM
  3. Malatesta's Avatar
    DUDE, it's completely different hardware and the only thing that is the same in regards to software is the fact that they both incorporated gestures — but the gestures were completely different as well.
    Of course the hardware is different. As I mentioned, Fingerworks was for computer interfaces like trackpads, etc. Apple then adapted it for touchscreens or rather they used some Fingerworks/MultiTouch technology to augment their iPhone. That much is obvious.

    Different gestures? That's like saying a program uses different fonts. It means nothing. The gestures is just the way the signal is encoded to obey the command. They can change the gestures in the programming anytime. So Apple changed the gestures I don't see what that proves.

    You would imagine different devices, different platforms would have different requirements for gestures. Or maybe they decided certain gestures were better than others.

    It's the principles behind MultiTouch and Fingerworks that matters, not the exact hardware, software or even names.
    Why do people not bother to read what I post?
    Same could be said here Archie.

    Did you not read the article entitled:

    "Some iPhone touchscreen roots 'splained by FingerWorks inventors"

    ?
    They had patented their multi-touch technology (which is different to what Fingerworks developed, even though it is spelled much the same way) over a year prior to this.
    Right and Fingerwork's MultiTouch patents go back to the 1990's which Apple also bought.

    You don't mean to imply that Apple had no idea about Fingerworks, their technology and products in the late 1990's/early 2000's? It is just coincidence that one company had the technolgogy in the 1990's and Apple just happened to come up with an identical product and principles in 2003? Even having the same name?

    That would be like MS claiming that "Gadgets" in Vista were invented by them.

    They bascially funded, augmented and modified pre-existing technology. Why is that a controversial or a bad thing?
    02-28-2007 08:08 PM
  4. archie's Avatar
    Thanks for posting a link that supports what I have been trying to say: "...actually quite significant is the iPhone is a display with the multi-touch, and the FingerWorks was just an opaque surface. That's all I'm going to say there. There's definite similarities, but Apple's definitely taken it another step..."

    It looks like we are on the same page... for a change.
    03-08-2007 02:44 PM
  5. newtonjack's Avatar
    Looks like the Apple police took this one down too. Video no longer available:

    http://techdigest.tv/2007/02/watch_the_iphon.html
    03-09-2007 11:25 AM
  6. filsputin's Avatar
    Hey guys, I'm new here. There's a WM5 iPhone-like slider app compatible with square screens that's really nice. Check it out and download here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=304826

    Screenshot: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y15.../Screen012.png
    05-17-2007 02:42 AM
31 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD